The slower you go, the more you need to precisely time a technique that keeps the front wheel up. In his case, he was already very far back, which is a big reason why his rearward weight shift was pitifully weak.
You can offset this speed requirement by getting a bike that has less forward weight bias. You get a bike with less forward weight bias when it has its cranks closer to the rear wheel than the front. In other words, you want shorter chainstays AND/OR longer front center (the distance between the front wheel and crank). Other than getting a new frame with longer reach, you can get a longer front center by slackening your HA with angleset and/or fork with longer A2C.
Bikes that have less rearward weight bias will have you hanging off the back a lot more for a wide range of techniques, to offset how prone they are to going over the bars. Bikes that have too much rearward weight bias will have you feeling that the front lacks traction, and prone to washing out. When a bike is balanced so you're not purposefully hanging off the back or weighting the front so often, it's considered to be "balanced" and is easier to ride, since your neutral relaxed (centered) position is balanced. Can dead sailor a balanced bike and do surprisingly well.
Can generally adapt to any bike, if you have a good sense of weight bias. Some bikes require hanging back, especially short travel 29ers in smaller sizes. That same bike model might require little to no hanging back in size XL (e.g. Santa Cruz Blur 29), since the front center grows with each size. Vice versa is true too, some models that feel like it forces you to weight the front might feel balanced in smaller sizes, such as some "fun/aggro" bikes (e.g. Process 153 29, Whyte G170). No coincidence that a lot of manufacturers that are getting good reviews mentioning balanced geo are putting out mid-long travel 29ers with 435 CS and 1230 WB. I estimate that for every 5mm of CS change, the WB should grow 20mm, so 440 CS with 1250 WB would feel similarly balanced as the 435/1230 bike, but have all the pros and cons associated with longer WB.
I state this not as opinion or belief, but something I can support with evidence, facts, etc. No coincidence that the Pivot Shuttle, in size large with 437 CS and 1232 WB, will fly decently with little technique. The YT Decoy, Vitus E-Sommet, Fezzari Wire Peak, and a number of others would have similar weight balance in XL. Good luck getting the Trek Powerfly's front end off the ground with so much weight bias on it.
